AMIYA GOPAL HAZRA Vs. LAND REQUISITION COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application the legality of certain land acquisition proceeding started by the State of West Bengal has been challenged. The short facts of the case are as follows: The Petitioners are joint owners of a piece of land within the municipal area of Calcutta. This land comprises premises Nos. 1 and 3 Kulia Tangra Third Lane and premises Nos. 6-A, 6-B, 6-C and 7 Kulia Tangra 4th Lane. The petitioners allege that about 11 or 12 years back, they or their predecessore-in-interest settled three out of the said plots of land namely, premises Nos. 6-A, 6-B and- 6-C, Kulia Tangra 4th Lane with various monthly tenants and gave the said tenants the right to build their own structures on their respective plots of land. Several un lateral kabuliats were executed by these tenants in favour of the petitioners or their predecessors-in-interest. Premises No. 7, Kulia Tangra 4th Lane and 6. Kulia Tangra 3rd Lane had been settled about 20 years back with certain other tenants, on similar basis and these tenants after erecting their own structures on these plots of land have been residing there ever since. The tenants who had settled on premises Nos. 6-A,. 6-B and 6-C, Kulia Tangra 4th Lane were immigrant refugees from East Pakistan. The tenants of the other plots, namely, premises No. 7, Kulia Tangra 4th Lane and premises No. i, Kulia Tangra 3rd Lane are not however, refugees.

(2.) On or about 24th January, 1957 a notify cation was issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in the following terms:

(3.) The notification was published in the Calcutta Gazette of 24th January, 1957. Thereafter there was also a declaration under Section 6 of the said Act which declaration was published in the Calcutta Gazette of 25th February, 1960 through Notification No. 2580 L. A. dated the 19th February, 1960. After the first of these Notifications had been published the petitioners made various representations with the authorities concerned but apparently nothing availed. The petitioners allege, however, that in course of these representations it transpired that the proposed land acqusition proceedings had been started for the benefit of the same persons who are actually residing just now on the plots sought to be acquired and who have been the petitioners' tenants for long time. The petitioners further state that they had given various assurances to Government to the effect that the petitioners would take no steps to evict the tenants now existing on the said plots of land. In spite of such assurances. Government refused to drop the acquisition proceedings since, it is alleged, Government intended to give permanent title to the persons already in occupation under the petitioners. In any event, the declaration under Section 6 of the Act published on the 25th February 1960 as aforesaid set at rest these negotiations between the petitioners and Government.